 |
|
Home Columns  by Scott Tipton  by Chris Ryall  by Scott Bowden  by Joshua Jabcuga  by Jud Meyers    |  Ron Twoeagle |
Mailbag
Comics 101 Is in Session
Luke A. writes: I was looking through your mailbag, and was pleasantly surprised to see that someone had responded to my theory on why BATMAN BEGINS wasn't the Batman movie to end all Batman movies. I would like to respond to the comments that Christopher E. made.
The examples that Chris E. gave of Batman's training rhoughout the years I didn't mind. Having re-watched BTAS the last few years with the DVD's, I loved those stories, since I had never seen that story before. My knowledge of Batman has basically been what I saw on the 92 animated series. The terms Gold Age and Silver Age just fly above my head. *ducks* I have read Miller and Moore's Batman comics, but I only read other Batman comics in paperback, and not the monthly comics. So seeing Bruce learn from Zatana or fight Keiodiken were fresh stories for me and rewarding in that Bruce learned all these crime fighting techniques from different sources. Those eps are actually some of my favorite eps from the series.
But with BATMAN BEGINS, it's basically an extended version of something that is pop culture lore. That's the main problem I had with it. I kow this story. EVERYONE knows the story of Bruce's parents getting gunned down by a petty criminal in a back alley (although I liked that they changed the social event they were at from a Zorro movie to an opera) and how that was the moment of conception for Batman. We've known this for 60 odd years. You don't need to make a 2 1/2 hour version of something we already know. The aspects that I responded to was the various levels of corruption that permeated Gotham, and the depiction of the Scarecrow and how he was able to be an effective villain. As Scott pointed out, Scarecrow is a very tough character to handle in that you're trying to make a laughable concept for a villain scary. But in this case, it actually worked out.
And now that I think about it, I can accept the more modern look of Gotham depicted in the movie. I'm just still attached to the post-war art deco noir look of the animated series. Actually, I'm still attached to the animated series in general. There's a reaon why they consider BTAS to be the best incarnation of Batman in ANY medium. I can't wait to have kinds of my own so that I can at the right age, show them the series.
Strangely enough, now that they've gotten the exposition movie out of the way, I'm eager to see what they plan to do with THE DARK KNIGHT. With the character of Harvey Dent, I heard they're leaning towards either Guy Pearce or Liev Schreiber. If either one of them get the part, then I'll be totally psyched for it. They're both perfect for the job. Still on the fence about Heath Ledger as The Joker. I can't imagine him doing the manaical laugh as well as Mark.
And on a side note, do you think that they'll try ot get Harley in? I know that with a character as over the top as her, that maybe she should still remain an ink and paint character instead of flesh and blood. But maybe someone like Amy Poehler would be able to do the character justice.
Tipton: I don't expect a Harley appearance -- the casting of Ledger and reports from interviews that they're going with the original, darker, jewel-thief/murderer version of the Joker makes it seem like a madcap Harley wouldn't be a good fit.
James K. writes; The irony of the Peacemaker having all those weapon in his cave and on his person reminds me a lot of MacGuyver. While he hated guns, making bombs out of chocolate bars or literally using nitroglycerin from a hospital to blow up a wall was perfectly okay. What I would give to be able to do the things he could do w/a Swiss Army knife. Just an observation.
Tipton: Yeah, he is like a slightly crazier MacGyver.
Charlie Z. writes: I wanted to take a second and share a new site I've been working on...
http://manoamano.ning.com
The premise is that same argument that Stephen King wrote about in the preface to The Dark Knight returns... who would win, Superman or Batman? (I'm a Batman guy, myself.) On this site, I've expanded it to include a couple hundred characters from comics, video games, TV, movies and books.
I've been a big reader of yours for years now, and this seemed like the sort of thing you and your readers might enjoy.
If you do like the site, please feel free to offer some suggestions for new combatants or features.
Keep up the great work. Hope you enjoy the site.
Tipton: That's pretty funny stuff.
Andy E. writes: Hey, wow, I never realized Peacemaker was such a lame character. What really struck me though was that you didn't even mention Peacemaker's biggest contribution to comic-book history--he became the inspiration for Watchmen's 'The Comedian'.
Of course, he was murdered before the first page of the book, but I guess when you have a toilet on your head you take what you can get.
Tipton: Yeah, I haven't mentioned any of the Charlton characters connections to WATCHMEN -- saving it for its own column.
Mike W. writes: I saw a reader letter on why Batman still distrusts Hal. While we all know what a continuity nut Geoff Johns is, I think he may have missed this two-part JLA/Spectre prestige format series they did back when Hal was the Spectre. It brings it the mistrust Batman has of Hal building up to when the Spectre sacrifices his essence to save the JLA and they have to get it back. Trying to talk Hal back, Batman gets a good speech:
"Listen to me, Hal -- I was wrong about you! You were the best and brightest
among us. And when you fell -- it ... rattled me -- and it made me wonder: If a man
as good and decent as you could go wrong ...what hope was there for the rest of
us? But I see now -- that one of the reasons you were reborn as the Spectre -- was to give us all hope! I see now -- that you're more of a hero than ever!"
That's the anchor the Spectre needs to come back. Afterward...
Batman: "Hal...what I said..."
Hal: "I know. You just said it because you knew it'd get me back."
Batman: "I meant every word."
So I was a bit surprised they brought the mistrust issue back. Of course, as John Stewart pointed out in the Rebirth mini, the real reason Batman didn't like Hal was because Hal was the one guy not afraid of him. "And what's Batman without the fear? Just a man."
Also, on the JLA issues, I've seen a few reviews criticizing how arrogant it is for Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman to assume that every hero would automatically jump to be part of the League. Still, as you pointed out, they're the archetypes and that adds something to the decisions.
My quibble is how Diana is helping the League when Allan Heinberg says Donna Troy is going to be Wonder Woman as long as he's writing the book.
Tipton: Considering that Heinberg has already been replaced on the book (with the long shipping delays certainly not helping the book out), I think it's pretty safe to place JLA #0 after Heinberg's arc is over.
Tim Y. writes: Haven't written in a long while (a couple of exchangeswith Ryall, but nothing for the comics), but I had toaddress this one, especially since Mallrats has been
brought up.
I spent way too much time thinking about this in the 90s, and I finally decided that Lois COULD have Superman's baby (given that we remain firmly in the printed DCU). She could have his baby simply by going with him to the Fortress of Solitude, where she would either be shrunk to Kandorian size and live there for 9 months...OR she could live under a Red Sun lamp, of which I'm fairly certain Supes had a fair number of lying around back in the 70s and 80s, pre-death.
Either way she'd be safe from the fetus going all "Alien" on her.
What do you think? Sound plausible?
Tipton: Yeah, the red-sun thing would be worth a try.
Geoff T. writes: I was wondering about your thoughts on a couple of TV things:
I was a huge fan of the West Wing, but for some reason have avoided watching Sorkin's Studio 60. I couldn't figure out why for awhile, but I think I've figured it out.
The West Wing showed us the good, bad and ugly in the lives of people who chose to work in the White House, and now Studio 60 is doing the same thing, but with the entertainment business.
But the thing is, the people in the White House are trying to actively improve people's lives (or should be), and people in the entertainment business are generally only trying to, well, entertain. (Maybe Studio 60 is about people trying to make TV that actively makes people's lives better, but somehow I doubt it.)
I just find it really hard to take the step down to entertainment, where most people are rarely there for altuistric reasons. The whole thing reeks of creative masturbation.
That was long-winded, so I'll try to do the second one quickly:
I want to like Heroes, I really do, but it just feels like a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy of Lost with superheroes.
Is that your take?
I love the site, keep up the good work.
Tipton: Can't agree with you on STUDIO 60. Why does something have to be altruistic to make an effort for excellence admirable? Good, talented people trying to do the best work they can, and being funny at the same time? I'll watch that.
Lucy K. writes: Peacemaker had a name so good that I was perpetually disappointed by how bad the comic was. For one thing, it really looked like Ditko had a hand in it somewhere. Certainly the character design was pretty cool-- you're simply wrong about his helmet.
Peacemaker the character suffered from the "gadget for every situation" ex machina thing that that Martian from "Beano" had ( that character once used a concealed rotary saw in his bootheel to escape from being tied up. ).
Tipton: That helmet was a travesty. Bad from every angle.
Trevor C. writes: As always, love the column. Today I come to you with a quest which I can`t find the answer to. A friend I know at my LCS told me about this Joker story called Son of the Joker, or something to that degree. In the story, the joker trains some hood with everything he knows about Batman, thanks to his own trials and tribulations.
That includes, advice like this, "if he takes out the lights, abort" or, "whatever you do, don`t let him near his car". I heard about this story and thought, "I`ve got to read this, it sounds great." My friend said it was in a batman title annual. I checked all of the regular suspects, batman, detective, shadow of the bat, legends, gotham knights, just for a cover blurb, but I found nothing.
Now there is a son of the joker story from back in the 50s, but this particular story that I am looking for is far more recent.
so scott, can you help a brotha out?
Tipton: Not ringing any bells, I'm afraid. Anyone?
Chris C. writes: Great work on the site as always. I'm sure you have been getting plenty of mail about the Rom skit on Robot Chicken this past week. Don't know if anyone gave a link, but I uploaded the bit on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E13GMhbIttE
Enjoy and have a great day!
Tipton: That was a vintage Rom figure, too. Nice!
Nick B. writes: Okay, here's the thing about restarting the Batman franchise, but continuing Superman's: I think DC/Warner Brothers (/Legendary Entertainment?) is heading toward a new "continuity" for their films.
Allow me to explain (keeping in mind that I wholeheartedly agree with the other Nick B. from last week's Mail Bag, who discussed the reasons behind Kal El's leaving Earth while Lois was Superpregnant, etc.): From a timing standpoint, we have Superman existing as a public entity something like seven years before Superman Returns begins, then leaving for five years. Then coming back. But, shortly before he returns (another clue, by the way, is the titling -- I'm pretty sure that's not a word, but whatever -- the titling of the films: Superman Returns, and Batman Begins), another figure rises, in another city (and I know Superman is/would be a global phenomenon, but I'll get to that): Batman shows up in Gotham. Bruce Wayne has returned to his home after being gone for seven or eight years (before the events of Batman Begins, which we can assume takes place before Superman Returns), and even being declared legally dead. Ouch. So, we have two heroes who are almost completely oblivious to each other, but quite possibly exist in the same universe (Gotham is even mentioned in Superman Returns, but that's pretty much mandatory). How can a man who dresses up as a bat not know of a man who flies (and vice versa)? Easy. The public has a short memory. If a man came from nowhere, flew around, and saved the world, and then was gone for more than three years with no promise of return, do you think America would really remember? Maybe, but it wouldn't be at the top of everyone's list of hot topics. Especially in a city drowning in corruption and poverty, like Gotham city, where flights of fancy have little or no value to someone trying to survive. So nobody mentions it to Bruce. He will likely find out, but until Superman returns (haha, yeah), he likely won't care. Because he's Batman. He's like that. When Superman does show his face again (and Bruce Wayne will definitely know about that), Batman begins (haha, two of 'em! it's not hard, though...) to plan. Because he's like that. Superman would almost definitely know nothing about Batman, because ol' Bats is still an urban legend in Gotham (the people there -- especially in "The Narrows" -- still probably remember him as a flying demon who calls bats, given the events of Batman Begins), and probably isn't known outside of the state, unlike Supes, who (in Superman Returns) is featured in every major news outlet (while Batman gets an article in the Gotham Gazette in Batman Begins). Holy overblown theories, Adam West!
I think that's about it. If I remember anything else, I'll tell you (but you probably don't want any more of my ranting). I really hope this is the track the filmakers are heading down.
Yay, wishful thinking!!
Tipton: Nice idea, but it'll never happen. Too much money in keeping the franchises separate.
Lucy K. writes: Mantlo and Golden's "Micronauts" was about the best comic of that era.
Particularly due to Golden's wonderful art.
Tipton: Absolutely.
Jordan N. writes: The hell with "bear with me for the set-up"... the set-up rocks. i have vague memories of having micronauts toys as a kid and vague memories of having
micronauts comics... and i remember there being a bit of a disconnect (these are supposed to be the same characters in the same world? bug is supposed to be force commander, as one site has it?).
really cool to have a run-down on the toys before you get into the comic. while on the subject, why not a column devoted to a few comics designed to sell toys? can't imagine there being a whole article based around sectaurs or starriors or whatever toy based comic you might remember, but a quick run-down could be cool... marvel's g.i. joe comic would deserve it's own column (or series), of course... way better than any comic designed to sell toys has any right to be (thank you mr. hama)... and while you're at it, an article on mego's superhero line could be cool.
even before toyfare magazine's brilliant use of them, i had very fond childhood memories of mego spidey and friends... anyway... thanks again for a fun tuesday night of reading... can't wait for next week...
Tipton: GI Joe and Mego sound like likely columns. We'll see.
Matt M. writes: I really look forward to your lesson on the Micronauts, as that series is one that I'm very familiar with. If you're still composing the lessons, I strongly recommend NOT skipping or skimming The New Voyages, which was probably the highlight of the entire series.
I loved the Micronauts just because of how tight the series was. The first 13 issues are a tightly plotted thriller that ratchets up the danger for the characters with each issue. Then comes the big gigantic war of issue 12 or 13. I love it.
Also, don't forget to mention Baron Karza's eventual death with issue 59. It's such a beautiful and simplistic way to fight a villain. Just say to the Gods that you want to fight each other as men would. Very touching.
Oh, and don't forget to mention Captain Universe's appearance.
I look forward to your explanation of the physics of the Micronauts. If you read the letter columns of the Micronauts, they were handing out No-Prizes left right and centre because the size of the ship Endeavour was so inconsistent. For such a big ship, it was really small on Earth 616.
Tipton: Yeah, that first 13 issues is just about the best.
Sam P. writes: Don't know if you're ever seen the toy mag Super Seven, but the last issue
had a 6 page interview with ken kelly about the micronaut packages and full
page art of all of the packages.
Tipton: That was a great article.
Picture of the Week
Full-color EC Comics Archive Editions? Sweeeeeet...
See you next week.
